NEWSOM’S NUKE — Gavin Newsom kicked off his new podcast today with a bang.
The California governor and prospective presidential candidate broke with Democratic Party orthodoxy on a host of issues, including one of the most polarizing of all — the participation of transgender athletes in female college and youth sports.
In his debut podcast episode, Newsom departed from the party line by suggesting that Democrats were wrong to allow transgender athletes to participate in female youth sports, distanced himself from the left’s use of pronouns and the gender-neutral term “Latinx,” called police defunding “lunacy,” and agreed that there had been some questionable practices in the leadership of the Black Lives Matter organization.
The governor’s comments, which came during a conversation with Charlie Kirk, the Donald Trump ally and campus culture warrior who leads the organization Turning Point USA, weren’t especially controversial — they were largely in line with how most Americans think, according to polls. Yet they stood out because, in the wake of Trump’s November victory, so few Democratic officials have been willing to publicly acknowledge where the party may have gone off the rails, and also because the party has shown little tolerance for dissent on social issues in recent years.
Newsom and Kirk discussed the attack ads that Trump’s campaign used to politically ruinous effect against Kamala Harris, featuring her support for taxpayer-funded gender transition-related medical care for detained immigrants and federal prisoners.
“She didn’t even react to it, which was even more devastating,” Newsom said. “Then you had the video [of Harris] as a validator. Brutal. It was a great ad.”
On the issue of transgender athletes in female college and youth sports — currently headline news in California, where a high school trans athlete’s recent record-smashing performance has attracted international attention — Newsom made clear his support for trans rights generally but called it “an issue of fairness. It’s deeply unfair.”
Newsom expressed sympathy for trans people and flagged their higher rates of suicide and depression. “The way that people talk down to vulnerable communities is an issue that I have a hard time with,” he said.
But the governor conceded there was a question of fairness in competition. “I am not wrestling with the fairness issue,” he told Kirk, who contended that it was unfair for transgender women to compete in women’s sports. “I totally agree with you.”
Newsom’s remarks were immediately denounced by many Democrats, though the criticism was relatively muted because of his pioneering support for LGBTQ+ rights as mayor of San Francisco.
Provoking a reaction may have been the point. In breaking with his party on trans athletes and underscoring his willingness to go toe-to-toe with top conservative communicators and leaders — such as Kirk, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Fox News’ Sean Hannity — Newsom is claiming a distinctive space in a party and remaking the 2028 Democratic fault lines. And as the governor of the nation’s biggest blue state, he provided cover for other Democrats who are seeking a different kind of messaging in their support for trans rights.
To better understand Newsom’s move and its political implications, Nightly reached out to Christopher Cadelago, the California bureau chief at POLITICO who’s covered Newsom for years.
Gavin Newsom’s suggestion that Democrats were wrong to support allowing transgender athletes to participate in female college and youth sports is generating quite a bit of buzz today. It’s a contentious issue that Republicans have zeroed in on with considerable success, since polls show a majority of Americans favor requiring trans athletes to compete on teams that match their sex assigned at birth. What’s Newsom’s motivation here?
I’ve spoken with Newsom about transgender issues and the broader culture wars several times, publicly and privately, over the last two years. Some of the impulse for speaking out on trans youth athletes in girls sports comes from the fact that he’s a dad of four school-age kids — including two daughters — who hears directly from other parents of school-age kids in gyms, on the soccer field and on baseball diamonds.
“Every one of my friends is freaked out about this,” Newsom told me today.
There’s also a part of Newsom that delights in walking up to the line on taboo issues and saying things you’re not supposed to say out loud. He sees his brand as being on the leading edge of political debates. He resists going small, trusts his radar for seeing around corners and loves stretching out and reaching for the next bold stroke.
That’s the part of him that looks at Donald Trump and, while he disagrees with most of what the president is doing, Newsom can’t help but admire and even envy the chutzpah with which Trump does it.
In granular detail, Newsom is always talking about ways he can break through the noise; ensure his face and ideas and work are appearing in more group text chats and social media feeds. He’s always thinking about how he can be a better media maestro.
Then there’s the cold political reality. Newsom has now closely watched his old friend and sometimes rival Kamala Harris lose two presidential campaigns. Harris’ 2024 campaign has fought like hell — sometimes to the point of gaslighting — in arguing that the Trump campaign’s attacks on her over trans issues didn’t add up to much. We all know that’s nonsense because it contradicts not only data, but common sense. Some of her aides were in denial. Others just couldn’t bring themselves to admit it because it’s not politically correct.
But Democrats have to confront why they’re clinging to the losing side of an 80-20 issue. Because if they don’t move past the denial stage, they risk losing again in 2028, and perhaps for longer. Newsom knows this. So, he decided to trot out with another Paul Revere moment.
His remarks came on his debut podcast, called “This is Gavin Newsom.” I can’t help but ask: Since the job of governing the nation’s biggest state is pretty demanding — and since Newsom already has a national profile — why is he doing a podcast?
It’s cliche now, but 2024 was the “podcast election.” Newsom wants to be on the leading edge of platforms and issues, and podcasting allows him to combine those two subjects.
This came up in the Charlie Kirk interview, but there’s growing consensus that Democrats can’t subordinate their old, tired talking points and be original and authentic and defend their positions in real time. They too often struggle to defend their positions in spontaneous, unscripted environments. There’s so much caution; it just doesn’t work anymore. We’ve all become too skilled at calling out bullshit. Newsom is trying to carve out a lane in a space that’s dominated by MAGA voices. I think Newsom envisions a time two years into the future where he’s hosting a top podcast in politics and public affairs.
What does he get from that? Well, potentially a lot. Let’s face it. Lots of people still see him as a cardboard cutout, his hair perfectly shellacked by a metric ton of goop. Or they view him as the woke-serving whipping boy of Fox News from liberal California — the “failed state” and land of fruits and nuts. Think what you want of him, but the guy is not just a pretty-boy resistance warrior. He can actually go pretty deep in the weeds on policy. He has nuanced views. And the way to reveal that is in multiple hour-long conversations.
Newsom’s comments were made during a one-on-one discussion with a guest that many of his podcast listeners might not have expected — influential MAGA-world figure Charlie Kirk, an influential campus culture warrior and close ally of Donald Trump. Was Newsom trying to make a particular point?
Democrats won’t win by staying in their comfortable information bubbles. You can only do so many hits on Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC show. Not only should Democrats venture out of their comfort zones, they should go to places where they have to actually defend their ideas.
But many in the party are scared. Everyone freaks out about everything. Let’s face it — folks on the right just don’t trigger so easily.
When I asked Newsom recently about who else he wants to have on, he pointed to CPAC’s lineup. The challenge will be how to calibrate the level of pushback. Newsom wants to have real conversations. But there’s still an expectation from Democrats that he won’t let ideological opponents just drone on without sufficiently challenging, if not their motives, at least their views.
That’s the balancing act I’m eyeing.
Newsom’s comments about transgender athletes come with some risk, at least within his own party. Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton, for example, faced a torrent of criticism from Democratic Party activists and officials for saying something similar after the November election. What has the Democratic reaction been like today?
Newsom’s bonafides on LGBTQ+ rights are better than Moulton’s. There aren’t many rising Democrats out there who have done as much for as long for the community.
Newsom upset leaders in his own party when, as San Francisco mayor in 2004, he defied state law and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Even the late Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a close Newsom supporter, blamed him for John Kerry’s defeat that year at the hands of George W. Bush, saying the marriages were “too much, too fast, too soon” and that they helped energize conservatives.
Some liberals, and especially folks inside Newsom’s own Capitol community in Sacramento, are telling me and my colleagues that they’re upset and disappointed with him. A few rolled their eyes or shook their heads. One Democratic state lawmaker licked a finger and hoisted it upward to catch a brief gust of imaginary wind while offering a knowing look.
And there’s still a question about whether he’s really taking on his own party. After all, polls show a solid majority of Democrats don’t believe trans athletes should play girls’ sports. It means that while he is challenging Democratic orthodoxy, and certainly the views of some politicians and activists, he’s not necessarily taking on the voters.
Are Newsom’s remarks on trans athletes — and his criticism of language policing, cancel culture and defunding the police — an attempt to carve out a distinct lane in the 2028 Democratic Party presidential primary?
Newsom can’t run for president as a California progressive, or even a progressive at all. He can’t pass their purity tests. His only credible lane is center-left. It’s the Joe Biden lane.
He’s only one show into the podcast, but a clear motivation seems to be an attempt to give people a view of him in full. Embedded in this calculation is a belief that some of the old rules of politics just don’t apply anymore — that there’s no reason why you can’t be both politician and pundit rolled into one; that the more you talk, the more leeway you’ll get.
Still, Newsom can be a polarizing figure. It’s hard to find people with subtle views of the governor. What listeners are going to see — if he’s true to himself — is a risk-taker who is very much the author of his own words (Newsom, for example, detests giving teleprompter speeches).
He cites flurries of numbers and statistics, but he also operates on feel and vibes. He debated Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis; trades texts with his old “pal” Sean Hannity of Fox News and much prefers crashing a NewsMax set to sitting for a staid interview with a public radio broadcaster. In the chat with Kirk, Newsom talked about the asymmetric nature of appearing on CNN for three minutes when politicians on the right can plug into an entire network of connected broadcasters.
He wants to be seen as unscripted and unpredictable and authentic. And for that to happen, he’s going to have to keep saying interesting and newsworthy and, yes, controversial things.
But it all raises a question: Can he be both Bill Maher-like and the next president?
Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at [email protected]. Or contact tonight’s author at [email protected] or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @PoliticoCharlie.
A message from the Coalition to Empower Our Future:
With young people experiencing elevated levels of anxiety, hopelessness and loneliness, the Coalition to Empower our Future is seeking to convene a conversation to better understand the many contributing factors surrounding youth mental health. Scientific studies and mental health professionals have found youth wellbeing is a complex and multifaceted issue with several contributing factors. By convening a wide array of perspectives and expertise, the coalition hopes to identify meaningful and comprehensive solutions. Learn more.
— Trump puts new limits on Elon Musk: President Donald Trump convened his Cabinet in person today to deliver a message: You’re in charge of your departments, not Elon Musk. According to two administration officials, Trump told top members of his administration that Musk was empowered to make recommendations to the departments but not to issue unilateral decisions on staffing and policy. Musk was also in the room. The meeting followed a series of mass firings and threats to government workers from the billionaire Tesla founder, who helms the Department of Government Efficiency, that created broad uncertainty across the federal government and its workforce.
— Trump delays tariffs on many Canadian, Mexican imports for one month: President Donald Trump, in an abrupt about-face, announced today that he will delay 25 percent tariffs on a significant portion of Mexican and Canadian goods until next month. The carve-out applies to autos and all other goods from the two countries that comply with the duty-free terms of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, White House officials said. The update marks a significant retreat of the tariffs on the two North American neighbors that went into force on Tuesday, and would apply to approximately 38 percent of imports from Canada and 50 percent from Mexico.
— Democratic congressman censured for joint session outburst: The House voted 224-198 today to censure Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) for disrupting President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress this week. Green shouted at Trump during the Tuesday night address and was ordered removed from the House chamber by Speaker Mike Johnson, prompting a flurry of GOP efforts to punish him for the disruption. The censure measure was introduced and called up by Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) through a fast-track process allowing for quick consideration on the House floor. Democratic leaders didn’t formally whip against the measure, and 10 Democrats voted with all Republicans in support of the censure.
— Trump targets prominent Democratic-linked law firm: President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order targeting Perkins Coie, a prominent Seattle-based law firm that regularly represents Democratic and liberal groups. The executive order suspends security clearances for employees of the law firm, which has long provided legal work for the Democratic National Committee, other Democratic entities and Democratic campaigns, including Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. The firm was central to the commissioning of the infamous “Steele dossier,” which was published shortly before Trump was inaugurated in 2017. Former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele was commissioned by Fusion GPS, a research firm that had been hired by Perkins Coie, to dig up information about Trump’s business relationships overseas.
— Veterans cuts spark GOP backlash on Capitol Hill: Military veterans have been disproportionately affected by the administration’s early cuts, and GOP lawmakers have unleashed a rare tide of public pushback. That reached a crescendo this week as the Trump administration raises the possibility of large-scale dismissals of Department of Veterans Affairs employees. Mass firings at the VA began weeks ago, spurring a flurry of panicked calls from GOP lawmakers to the White House. But a new memo outlines the potential for 80,000 more firings across a roughly 480,000-person department, according to an internal memo obtained by POLITICO. Senate Veterans’ Affairs Chair Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) said in a statement that while the massive department is “in need of reform,” efforts to downsize “must be done in a more responsible manner,” after the AP first reported the 80,000 figure Wednesday.
A message from the Coalition to Empower Our Future:
COLLATERAL DAMAGE — Northern Ireland could suffer collateral damage in President Donald Trump’s impending trade war with the European Union — thanks to its hybrid status post-Brexit. The EU is firmly within Trump’s sights in his escalating tariff raid, with the president promising retribution for the bloc’s “brutal” trade practices by threatening 25 percent tariffs, claiming the bloc was created to “screw the United States.”
In turn, the EU has warned that Trump’s protectionist policies “will not go unanswered.”
U.K. ministers, meanwhile, are scrambling for an exemption to fresh tariffs, in the hope that the country’s “balanced” trading relationship with the U.S. could mean Trump takes a softer approach to Britain than its neighbors across the channel. But tariffs from any side could create a fresh Brexit headache for traders in Northern Ireland, which is part of the U.K. but has no hard border with the Republic of Ireland. The prospect has already got unionists hot under the collar, while others spy an investment opportunity.
SANS ORBAN — European Union leaders have endorsed military support for Ukraine but without the support of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
At an emergency summit today in Brussels, Orbán, who hasn’t hidden his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, vetoed an EU-wide push to replace American military aid. President Donald Trump announced the freezing of military assistance to Kyiv on Monday. The EU’s other 26 leaders moved forward without Hungary and published their own conclusions.
“Achieving ‘peace through strength’ requires Ukraine to be in the strongest possible position, with Ukraine’s own robust military and defense capabilities as an essential component,” the joint statement said. “The European Union remains committed, in coordination with like-minded partners and allies, to providing enhanced political, financial, economic, humanitarian, military and diplomatic support to Ukraine and its people.”
The text also vows to step up pressure on Russia by imposing further sanctions and better enforcing existing ones “in order to weaken its ability to continue waging its war of aggression.” While that enables a technical fix, it again exposes the difficulties the EU has in formulating a consistent position toward Putin ― and Trump.
CAN THE U.S. BE TRUSTED? — Intelligence sharing among NATO countries is in danger as members become increasingly wary of one another, and the earthquake unleashed by Donald Trump risks making things worse, current and former alliance and security officials from across the alliance told POLITICO.
There have long been strains caused by distrust between the alliance’s traditional Western members and newcomers from the ex-communist east. That grew worse following Russia’s attack on Ukraine, when pro-Russia Hungary, joined recently by Slovakia, are seen as unreliable, said eight current and former NATO and security officials with knowledge of intelligence sharing at the alliance. Many were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.
But now the U.S. shift toward Russia under Trump is shaking the core of the alliance — prompting countries to wonder about the risk of sharing intelligence with Washington, said five of the officials.
A message from the Coalition to Empower Our Future:
To move closer toward meaningful solutions, we must work collaboratively to better understand youth mental health and wellbeing in its full complexity. Economic hardships and poverty, overuse of devices and social media, food and housing insecurity, fear of violence, social isolation, bullying and more should all be taken into account. The Coalition to Empower our Future is working to bring together mental health experts, parents, youth, nonprofit representatives, industry leaders, educators, policymakers and others in a coordinated and urgent manner. Without a fulsome approach, we may lose an opportunity for fully informed solutions that address all the factors impacting young people’s mental health. Identifying well-informed solutions can also help support and equip parents and communities with the tools and resources needed to enhance support for young people. We must meet this moment for our children and their futures. Watch our new ad and join us.
CHEATGPT — AI tools like ChatGPT and Google Gemini now make it possible to obtain college essays with little more effort than it takes to snap your fingers. Ask one of these chatbots for a paper on Plato’s Republic, or on the ethics of buying and selling kidneys — or just input an exam prompt — and, within seconds, out pops a paper that will look to a lot of people like something a human wrote. If your instructor doesn’t know what to look for, or if the AI you are using is good enough, you can convince them you have mastered the topic without needing to learn anything about it at all. Troy Jollimore writes in the Walrus magazine how he once believed university was a shared intellectual pursuit, but that his faith has been obliterated by the rampant and lazy use of AI by so many of his students.
Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.
